Re: [PATCH 1/2] ASoC: es8311: dt-bindings: add everest es8311 codec

[matteomartelli3@xxxxxxxxx]

On Monday, 13 May 2024 10.53.57 CEST Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 10/05/2024 15:00, Matteo Martelli wrote:
> > Add DT bindings documentation for the Everest-semi ES8311 codec.
> > 
> > Everest-semi ES8311 codec is a low-power mono audio codec with I2S audio
> > interface and I2C control.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Matteo Martelli <matteomartelli3@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  .../bindings/sound/everest,es8311.yaml        | 52 +++++++++++++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 52 insertions(+)
> >  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/everest,es8311.yaml
> > 
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/everest,es8311.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/everest,es8311.yaml
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 000000000000..54fb58b9ab58
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/everest,es8311.yaml
> > @@ -0,0 +1,52 @@
> > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause)
> > +%YAML 1.2
> > +---
> > +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/sound/everest,es8311.yaml#
> > +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
> > +
> > +title: Everest ES8311 audio CODEC
> 
> This looks exactly like es8316, except of later added port. Are you sure
> you are not planning to add port later, which would make both schemas
> identical?

I did not pay enough attention to audio-graph-port property which is in
fact supported and could be added as well. Thus the es8311.yaml would be
identical to es8316.yaml. My guess is that I should just add the
"everest,es8311" compatible string to the existing es8316.yaml even if the
two drivers are separate (like for instance mediatek,mt8186-clock.yaml). Is
this correct?
If that's the case:
* should the evereset,es8316.yaml file be renamed to evereset,es831x.yaml?
* should I also add myself to the maintainers list of that schema?

> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
> 
> 

Thanks for your support,
Matteo Martelli